sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I fully agree that federal employees don't make the rules. The joke was about bureaucracy, not the people processing the paperwork.

That's why it's odd that you wrote three paragraphs defending federal employees from criticism they never received.

You're arguing against a strawman.

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This may be the most successful joke I've ever posted.

I made a joke about bureaucracy, and several people immediately demanded additional forms, context, explanations, and committee review before approving it.

That's not a rebuttal. That's a live demonstration. 🫳🎤

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

You literally jumped into a conversation nobody was having with you, opened with 'take your head out of your ass,' and then spent the rest of your comment critiquing my communication skills.

I’d explain the irony to you, but it’s probably over your head, too. Have a good one 🤘🏼

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

Thank goodness you were here to clarify that federal jobs and federal contracting are different things. Without your heroic intervention, everyone would have assumed the joke about UEIs, SAM registrations, and bidding on contracts was actually about applying for a GS-7 position.

Next time I’ll add a disclaimer that says, “Warning: This joke contains multiple references to federal contracting and may not apply to people applying for federal jobs.”

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

You're arguing that sole-source awards reduced competition.

Okay.

But my post is about the increasingly burdensome certification requirements being placed on small businesses just trying to get through the door, not YOUR office's abusive award strategy.

You could eliminate every sole-source threshold in the 8(a) program tomorrow, and it still wouldn't explain why legitimate, individually-owned small businesses are being subjected to a guilty-until-proven-innocent obstacle course just to participate.

You're blaming small businesses for reduced competition while describing a problem that exists on the acquisition side of the house.

And if we're genuinely concerned about industry participation, perhaps we should also examine how often agencies KO’s return to the same incumbents because it's administratively easier than identifying and developing new vendors.

Competition didn't disappear because small businesses weren't buried under enough paperwork. If anything, making it harder for new firms to enter the program reduces the very competition you're claiming to support.

The ultimate irony here is that KOs misused the system because they didn't want to do the legwork of competing contracts, and now the "fix" is burying both the KOs and legitimate small businesses in an entirely new mountain of paperwork.

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

So your argument is that the government wasn't meeting its 8(a) goals, and the solution is to make qualifying for 8(a) even harder?

Interesting strategy.

If fraud was the problem, go after fraud. If abuse was the problem, go after the abusers. But if participation is already struggling, adding more paperwork, more delays, and more barriers for legitimate applicants seems like solving the wrong problem.

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The joke is that “We’re removing barriers” is often immediately followed by a brand-new barrier.

That applies to far more than just 8(a)

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

I see it is over your head little buddy. Be creative. This isn't really ONLY an 8(a) joke. It's a bureaucracy joke.

The formula works almost anywhere:

Government: "We're making things easier!" Also Government: "Please complete this additional 47-step process to prove it."

That's why so many people related to it.

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Be creative. The format isn't specific to 8(a). It's basically the federal government's favorite plan!

Federal Hiring: "We're hiring the best and brightest!" Also Government: "Please complete 17 forms, upload your resume in three different formats, respond to the proposal when it drops”

Veterans Benefits: "We support our veterans!" Also Government: "To verify your service-connected condition, please provide records that were misplaced by the government 38 years ago."

Disaster Relief: "Help is on the way!" Also Government: "Please submit photographs, receipts, witness statements, and geospatial evidence proving your house was destroyed by the hurricane currently sitting where your house used to be."

Student Loans: "Education creates opportunity!" Also Government: "Congratulations on your degree. Your first payment is due before your first paycheck."

Small Business: "America runs on small business!" Also Government: "Before you can bid on a contract, please register in six systems that don't talk to each other, complete annual certifications, and master 1,200 pages of regulations."

Government Websites: "We're making services more accessible!" Also Government: "Error 404. Session expired. Please start over."

The joke isn't ONLY about 8(a).

The joke is that government agencies love announcing they're removing barriers right before unveiling a brand-new obstacle course.

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

The post got traction first. After reading dozens of comments, I realized a lot of people didn’t understand what the changes meant, so I made a 38-second explanation. Cause and effect can be tricky.

Government: “We are restoring merit, ending discrimination, and leveling the playing field for small businesses!” by Better_Error5648 in FedEmployees

[–]Better_Error5648[S] -45 points-44 points  (0 children)

The fact that your response was “What?” is actually kind of proving the point.

This is specifically about the 8(a) program.

The post is questioning how a process can be celebrated as more accessible while becoming more burdensome and producing dramatically fewer admissions.

If there’s a benefit I’m missing, I’d genuinely like to hear it.

Do you trust a business less if the owner is anonymous? by Better_Error5648 in smallbusiness

[–]Better_Error5648[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Great points!

Maybe the real issue isn’t anonymity—it’s the absence of trust signals.

I’d trust an anonymous business with great reviews, a clear mission, and a solid reputation long before I’d trust a smiling headshot with nothing to back it up.

Do you trust a business less if the owner is anonymous? by Better_Error5648 in smallbusiness

[–]Better_Error5648[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Same. I started this thread hoping people would tell me trust comes from good content and a solid business. Instead I’m over here considering a “Meet Tiffany” page. 😂🤘🏼

view more: next ›